Joining a Twitterverse filled with rock stars, actors, politicians and athletes, one Bay Area judge has decided to break ranks with most of his black-robed peers who are worried about the ethical and practical trap doors of social media.
Adding an @ to his resume at a time when the law and social media are colliding more than ever, Paul Grewal, a U.S. magistrate judge in San Jose, rang in the New Year by becoming the region’s first federal judge — and one of few in the country — to start a public Twitter account. For the past few weeks, “iampaulgrewal” has debuted on Twitter, where he’s closing in on 300 followers.
“Would you want a traffic court judge who’s never driven a car?” he explained on his Twitter profile. “Why should magistrate judges be any different when it comes to tech?”
In dabbling so publicly in social media, the 43-year-old Grewal, who has had a hand in such major cases as the Apple v. Samsung smartphone feud, is unlike most state and federal judges who tend to be far more comfortable writing thick legal opinions than 140-character tweets — and who also prefer to remain outside the instantaneous spotlight of a public platform such as Twitter.
In some instances, judges do not want to risk the ethical fallout from a wayward tweet about a case or issue, or expose so much about themselves to the public it rises to a security threat.
But Grewal’s decision to jump on Twitter was more innocent, fueled more by his insatiable thirst for sports information than his place in the legal community. The Akron, Ohio, native is an inveterate Cleveland sports fan, and admits that sports talk radio, not NPR, is what is tuned to his car radio on his commute.
“It was readily apparent I was missing out on fun and interesting stuff by not being on Twitter,” he said.
Grewal reserves most of his own tweets for sports, notably the forlorn Cleveland Browns. But in one recent tweet, he offered advice to both his kids and lawyers: “Memo to children named Grewal and counsel briefing discovery fights to judges named Grewal — ‘he started it’ is not a persuasive lead argument.”
Grewal’s experiment comes at a time when courts around the country are coming to grips with a newer generation of judges more inclined to embrace social media such as Twitter and Facebook.
Numerous states, including California, have issued general guidelines for judges who use social networks. The California Judges Association four years ago suggested judges can join social networks but should proceed with extreme caution, avoiding any contacts or statements that run afoul of ethical rules.
“The important issue here is what you say, not where you say it,” said Stephen Gillers, a New York University law professor and judicial ethics expert.
As a result, some judges maintain Facebook pages, although they tend to shield them from much public access and avoid discussing politics or cases and “friending” lawyers who may appear before them.
And Grewal is not alone in the Twitterverse: Alameda County Judge Vicky Kolakowski, the nation’s first openly transgender judge, has a public Twitter account. Don Willett, a Texas Supreme Court justice, is perhaps the most visible jurist on Twitter, with more than 12,000 followers.
There are no firm numbers of how many judges are on social networks. But Jeremy Fogel, a San Jose federal judge who heads the Federal Judicial Center in Washington, D.C., a policy arm for federal judges, said it is likely more judges will follow Grewal’s example because so many now join the bench exposed to social media.
Fogel himself prowls Twitter in an anonymous account, preferring to keep out of the public domain. He has no qualms with judges using social media, but like many judges contacted for this story simply warns of the need for extra care.
“This is still the public square,” Fogel said. “The thing that’s different is how accelerated it is. That’s one of the challenges.”
There also are security concerns, particularly for federal judges, who’ve been warned by their protectors at the U.S. Marshal’s Service that it would be best if they steer clear of social media, in part so they cannot be easily tracked. And, of course, most judges simply have yet to make a decision — Vince Chhabria, one of the newest federal judges in San Francisco who once blogged on the San Francisco 49ers for the Mercury News while still a lawyer, said last week: “I honestly just haven’t given it that much thought.”
There are judges who are not comfortable with social media. Former California Chief Justice Ronald George, who concedes he’s “roadkill on the information highway,” said he has “reservations.”
“There’s just something about the judicial position that should convey the impression one is sort of above the fray,” George added.
In Grewal’s case, the judge’s tweets have seldom dealt with the law, and he notes he’s unlikely to follow lawyers because they are so “damn dull.” For his part, Grewal acknowledges he needs to be careful, saying he’ll read his “tweets twice before hitting the send button.”
But the judge said he welcomes Twitter’s transparency, and sees it as a way to learn about a corner of the Internet he has to deal with in court.
“It seems to me that in the 21st century judges have a role to play in that conversation,” Grewal said. “I think it will become more common.”
Howard Mintz covers legal affairs. Contact him at 408-286-0236 or follow him at Twitter.com/hmintz.
